|
I don't get the GOP. The country as a whole is moving very much in the direction of acceptance and tolerance of gay people, and appears to be doing so pretty rapidly, and the GOP is going to make these Indiana type laws their hill to die on? Is it a last gasp of resistance to cultural change? Are they trying to prove a point? What?
|
#
¿
Mar 31, 2015 13:39
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 14, 2024 12:42 |
|
|
Fulchrum posted:They think they found a dogwhistle. "no no, this isn't about hating gay people, we're just protecting religious liberty...to hate gay people.". They think that if they can keep insist that screaming at gay people that you hate fags and they should get out of your shop is a religious right, no-one will call them anti-gay. This is the loudest dogwhistle ever though. It squarely identifies the GOP as "Party of Regressive Hatemongers" and I can't imagine this would be a good thing in places like VA, FL, WI, MI, PA, CO etc. with significant populations of moderate suburban folks who might actually be swing votes.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 1, 2015 01:41
|
|
|
It looks like he's going for a "Reservoir Dogs" kind of vibe.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 6, 2015 03:45
|
|
|
Mr Ice Cream Glove posted:No Muslim for Rand The biggest omission: No "GAY FOR RAND". Also, re: Perry's looks - that's the one big asset, aside from Texas connections and money support, that he has. He has the craggy distinguished handsome white CEO guy look people expect a TV character playing the US President to have. Problem is when he opens his mouth, he becomes the 30 Rock sitcom version of the President.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 8, 2015 00:54
|
|
|
site posted:Is it normal for attack ads to start this early. I mean, I get that the Republican party is eating itself and all, but these had to have been ready to go before Rand ever announced and it's so goddamn early in the season it just seems absurd to launch them. I wonder if mega pro-Israel hawk sugar daddies like Sheldon Adelson have a special interest in making sure the Rand candidacy is smothered in the crib (although he seems to be doing a drat good job all by himself). If Rand got traction, and won the nomination, Hillary or any Democrat would be free to move towards the left on defense/Israel and the Adelson/neocon viewpoint wouldn't be represented by either party, or at least not nearly to the degree they'd want.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 10, 2015 04:20
|
|
|
I think the logo is lame and it is funny how the awesome Obama 2008 logo has now made every major candidate feel like they have to have a logo. I kind of feel like her name in some kind of nice font would be fine, and preferable, to the arrow thingy.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 12, 2015 21:19
|
|
|
showbiz_liz posted:Do they think she is running against Obama again? Well he's guaranteed to lose/not be President after this election!
|
|
#
¿
Apr 14, 2015 16:32
|
|
|
Sanders would get annihilated versus virtually any GOP nominee. He's a self described socialist in a time and place (USA, 2015) where socialism is literally a dirty word to the majority of the country, even if a huge portion of those people who "hate" socialism actually support many of its principles, they just don't know them under that name. He's also not particularly well known. Because of his politics he'd have difficulty getting financial support for his campaign, i.e. the same reason we DnDers like him, the corporate pimps who do a lot of political contribution wouldn't touch him, and it's currently a huge money game until the rules are changed. But he'd never get the Democratic nomination for the same reasons. Edit: Also, he's not even a member of the Democratic Party. Parties don't nominate someone who isn't even officially in their party, regardless if he caucuses with them and if his politics are admired by a significant portion of the base.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 15, 2015 12:36
|
|
|
Mr Ice Cream Glove posted:
Wow. All this within days of her announcing. Is it possible that the GOP is actually going to "LOL OLD UGLY WITCH" their way into a loss by pissing off enough middle aged to older white women with this?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 16, 2015 16:24
|
|
|
Enigma89 posted:Either way, Hillary just looks silly carrying her luggage around and flying coach. Does anyone seriously think this will work? Connecticut born Ivy Leaguer GWB sold himself as a rootin' tootin' cowboy and got himself elected over Ann Richards as governor of Texas. Even got himself a ranch in Crawford just in time to get elected President, that was fake as hell too but it was easily sold to enough people that it "worked". People will largely believe what they want to believe, they just need a little fig leaf covering the truth.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 17, 2015 01:50
|
|
|
A Neurotic Jew posted:I know that elections are largely determined by the state of the economy, but I do wonder about what impact Obamacare might have. Is there any precedent for the fate of a newly implemented entitlement to hinge on an upcoming election the way Obamacare does? I have to imagine that the tangible benefits of Obamacare might be difficult for people to let go of regardless of how they feel about it in the abstract. I am hoping we get some good stats about this as things heat up. Well it will only help the Democrats if they actually campaign on it instead of running away from it. It's way too easy even for a lot of people who are ON Obamacare exchange health plans and previously were uninsured to not realize that they are actually ON Obamacare and benefiting from Democratic policy.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 17, 2015 02:00
|
|
|
Nice knowing you, Marco! It was fun while it lasted.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 19, 2015 22:31
|
|
|
ZeeToo posted:Took me a minute. He means "it grants credibility to the anti-genetic-science belief that sexual orientation is comparable in its predestination to race". Yeah, no, it still doesn't make any sense as far as I can see.. but that's okay. I don't need it to make sense. I think it's the addition of the "anti" that makes it completely nonsensical.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 20, 2015 02:45
|
|
|
Axetrain posted:I think he's claiming that Rubio's comments are making race comparable to sexuality, in that it's something you are born with. Yes I think that's exactly his message, but where does the "anti genetics" thing make any sense? On second thought, never mind...
|
|
#
¿
Apr 20, 2015 03:11
|
|
|
Space Gopher posted:There's a pretty strong folk-science belief in the evangelical community that says, "you can't be born gay, because that means it's genetic, which means it's inherited, gay people can't have children, and any inherited trait that stops people from having their own kids would die off in a single generation. Therefore, being gay must be a choice and anyone who says they were 'born this way' is lying." Yeah, okay, THIS I get. But the choice of words implied that there is actual hard data, conclusive scientific proof of this position when I'm pretty sure what data there is supports the opposite conclusion (such as twin studies showing highly increased probability of twins both being gay even when raised in different environments etc.), rather than the "folk science" idea that it's self evident just because. I remember reading a book by the biologist E.O. Wilson that had an opposite theory of this in it. If the genes that result in homosexuality are also associated with other traits leading to creativity, achievement etc. that lead to relatively high social standing among those carrying them, like being a religious shaman or an executive producer of a movie company, then a reproductive advantage would fall on their family and close relatives, thus resulting in increased evolutionary fitness for those genes. It's plausible in the context of societies, just like how the ability to form and use language should confer a massive evolutionary fitness advantage in the context of a society of organisms, but wouldn't be of obvious benefit when considering a single (primitive, hunting) creature.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 20, 2015 11:36
|
|
|
Orkin Mang posted:sounds like he just made it up He was just formulating a theory for a genetic association with homosexuality that would account for the fact that most gays don't reproduce, so yes he was just making it up. It would require lots of hard data to establish the truth and refine the edges of such a theory.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 20, 2015 11:49
|
|
|
Orkin Mang posted:the genetic association is far from established (many of the twin studies you're alluding to have been shown to be more or less worthless, for methodological and conceptual reasons) and even if it is something can be genetic and not have been naturally selected. My point in mentioning EO Wilson is that "common sense" reasoning (the gays don't have kids, durr) can also have as its counterpart "common sense" theories that conclude the opposite and without data and proof they are both equally worthless.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 20, 2015 12:00
|
|
|
I wouldn't have so much of a problem with unlimited superPAC money if there was a requirement that each candidate's biggest donor be identified, and that donor would have to appear at every debate and public appearance of the candidate with the candidate sitting in their lap, wearing nothing but a diaper.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 22, 2015 19:32
|
|
|
eternalname posted:Somewhere a number of pages back there was a debate over whether perry's 'oops' moment was really a big enough deal to shut him out as a serious candidate, and why he's still perceived as a joke. I was thinking about that the other day and if I remember correctly, his comments about anyone wanting to deny some sort of benefit to illegals (in state tuition?)being "heartless" did him in well before that. Perry actually had a number of instances where he embarrassed himself, the "oops" thing just happened to be the most notable one.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 24, 2015 04:00
|
|
|
PupsOfWar posted:He's repeatedly said that he single-issue-votes on a candidate's willingness to blow people up. To be fair, that is a much better single issue, in my opinion, than the majority of others that people vote on. (cough GUNS GUNS GUNS cough)
|
|
#
¿
Apr 29, 2015 21:17
|
|
|
Lindsey is totally checking that guy out.
|
|
#
¿
May 2, 2015 20:17
|
|
|
Barracuda Bang! posted:Did he actually join the military in any capacity after college? I believe that uniform was from when he was in the Texas A&M corps of cadets, so not real military, but I believe he did spend some time in the Air Force as a pilot for a bit too.
|
|
#
¿
May 7, 2015 06:20
|
|
|
Jeb Bush is coming across as a lazy candidate. As if his approach were that none of this matters until he officially announces and he can phone it in until then. Even retaining all the major neocon Iraq players from his brother's administration seems lazy. Yes, each party has a somewhat limited talent pool, but it shouldn't be impossible to avoid having Wolfowitz and the most recognizable names anywhere near his candidacy. In other news, the sky, she is falling! quote:Hillary Clinton trails a generic Republican presidential candidate by double digits among voters in six important battleground states, according to a new poll from the GOP firm Vox Populi.
|
|
#
¿
May 15, 2015 00:51
|
|
|
Expectations for Rick Perry are so low at this point that I suspect if he simply doesn't poo poo his pants (or if he only pisses on them) in his first few public appearances he'll be a media darling all of a sudden.
|
|
#
¿
May 17, 2015 20:17
|
|
|
Aliquid posted:That's why I think Perry is the next hot thing come the first debate on August 6th. Walker and Bush are unpolished while Rubio, Cruz and Paul come across as whiny. When they're all standing up next to each other, Perry will look the most presidential. I'm not saying he'll win the nomination, but I think he'll hit the top-tier in polling at least once this cycle. There's nothing polished about Perry. Now they may have been polishing him up during the offseason (beyond the "smart guy" glasses heh) but if 2012 showed anything it's that you can easily win multiple terms as incumbent GOP governor of Texas without having any difficult debates or media encounters. All that's required is to run, and toss a little red meat to the base from time to time. For proof just look at the foolishness the current Texas governor is inolved in, and he will easily win reelection too, any realignment in Texas is a long way off, it's only drifted further rightward the last several years. TV ads during primary season last election were a total horror show of who could be wingnuttiest.
|
|
#
¿
May 17, 2015 20:30
|
|
|
Kobayashi posted:The GOP needs a tournament bracket for debates, complete with seeding and everything. It'd be more entertaining the the NCAA tournament. This seems like it would be fun:  Seeding gets a bit tricky once you get down past number 5 or 6, just like in NCAA basketball.
|
|
#
¿
May 20, 2015 02:08
|
|
|
Mo_Steel posted:Don't you dare take it away. We get to force them to eat for our amusement, and I need every cathartic photo I can get. Universal health care it ain't, but it's SOMETHING.
|
|
#
¿
May 24, 2015 19:03
|
|
|
I don't think it's completely necessary for Jeb to be an 800 pound gorilla scaring most of the potential field from even entering the race the way Hillary is (her situation is an unusual circumstance), but he's so far from it that I'd think it would be a concern for both him and his handlers at this point. Money is huge but I'd think his early polling would give a lot of supporters the jitters about the possibility of a total flameout.
|
|
#
¿
May 31, 2015 02:29
|
|
|
Mr Ice Cream Glove posted:Hopefully Jindal brings his stellar education record to the race At times like this I have to repost Jimmy Carter's response when Georgia proposed to ban the word "evolution" from its school system: http://www.cnn.com/2004/EDUCATION/01/30/georgia.evolution/ quote:But Carter said dropping the word would leave Georgia's high school graduates "with a serious handicap as they enter college or private life where freedom of speech will be permitted." The "e" word was subsequently restored: http://www.nytimes.com/2004/02/06/education/06EVOL.html
|
|
#
¿
Jun 4, 2015 00:32
|
|
|
RevKrule posted:
The very existence of this tells me Christie doesn't have an inner circle worth a poo poo anymore since he had to burn out his old one to survive the immediate fallout of the bridge fiasco. Your campaign consiglieri, your Carville, Rollins or Rove, is supposed to prevent things like this from happening. Vetoes the idea of you doing an event like this out of hand, and leaves it to you to figure out why. Sure, go glad hand the NYC cops in fat man business suit. But this... but this... I will not abide another stretch pants incident!
|
|
#
¿
Jun 5, 2015 04:05
|
|
|
Swagger Dagger posted:It being mediocre was why I was surprised at how much access that Romney doc that hit Netflix had. I assumed they'd shut everyone out. If I recall the Romney doc was made by a friend/supporter and was specifically an effort to promote and rehabilitate his image so of course there was plenty of access. I'm sure it was intended to build up his cult of personality if he won with the backup purpose of humanizing him and promoting his image if he lost.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 7, 2015 17:43
|
|
|
Celador posted:The GOP brought this on themselves after Obama was elected and they went Full Retard and embraced the TEA Party and Duck Dynasty idiots. I thought we would never beat 2012 but here we are. Donald loving Trump. Yeah. I didn't think they (the GOP) would actually go there. I still feel the Palin nomination was the Opening Pandora's Box event that made all else possible. I feel like both men are wondering how exactly they arrived at this particular moment in time and space.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 18, 2015 01:14
|
|
|
Joementum posted:In which a subscriber to the Sarah Palin Channel notices there hasn't been much new content recently and draws the wrong conclusion. The Sarah Palin Channel: Picture a palm, smacking a human forehead. Forever.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 21, 2015 03:55
|
|
|
http://www.cnn.com/2015/06/20/politics/jeb-bush-confederate-flag/ I give Jeb credit for taking what in my view is the proper stance regarding the Confederate flag being flown over statehouses etc. I suspect this will likely cost him significant votes in the primary: quote:My position on how to address the Confederate flag is clear," he said in a written statement. "In Florida we acted, moving the flag from the state grounds to a museum where it belonged. This is obviously a very sensitive time in South Carolina and our prayers are with the families, the AME church community and the entire state. Following a period of mourning there will rightly be a discussion among leaders in the state about how South Carolina should move forward, and I'm confident they will do the right thing."
|
|
#
¿
Jun 21, 2015 04:12
|
|
|
I'm loving the fact that the GOP's crowded clown car allows Trump to corner the moron vote and actually get second place polling way ahead of "serious" candidates like Jindal, Christie or Santorum. I'll probably rue this day when Trump rides the Freeper vote to the White House and furnished it with slot machines at the entrance.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 26, 2015 15:06
|
|
|
Is there any particular reason why Santorum wouldn't inherit the usual runner up into presumptive nominee spot, other than the fact that he's obviously an unpleasant weirdo with no chance of winning a general election?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 29, 2015 02:22
|
|
|
I think about this a lot these days: doesn't the last decade of electing yahoos like the Palins, Cruz's, Pauls, Bachmanns, Ernsts etc. mean that there is no longer even a small pool of GOP officeholders who appear in any way serious or statesmanlike, such that the (still a majority I think) Americans who don't inject Fox News intravenously 24/7 could actually envision them as President of the country? There used to be people like Dick Lugar, Bob Dole, and even McCain kind of fit the bill although he really helped get this poo poo rolling with the Palin pick. Now the only people who seem remotely plausible as a President in the GOP have been out of office for a decade or more.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 6, 2015 15:03
|
|
|
This rollout campaign for the Walker logo reminds me of the old Simpsons episode where "Gabbo" was relentlessly hyped, and turned out to be a ventriliquist dummy act. Sounds about right. 
|
|
#
¿
Jul 6, 2015 18:05
|
|
|
Is it possible for we, the posters in this thread, to set up some kind of NCAA style pool of the primary outcomes? Points awarded to correctly picking the order in which people concede or drop out, correctly picking the last candidate standing etc., with increasing points awarded in the later rounds? There should be some kind of bonus for correctly picking the first person to drop out though. Then for the general election, for those who correctly chose the candidates in the contest, there should be points based on how close to the EV totals they come, and picking the specific states correctly.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 6, 2015 23:37
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 14, 2024 12:42 |
|
|
GalacticAcid posted:She misread the tattoo and thought it just said "hardworking." Heyoooooooooh
|
|
#
¿
Jul 8, 2015 01:15
|
|